Objective To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary stent implantation (PCI) in the treatment of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA). Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2012), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were electronically searched from inception to September 2012 for randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness and safety of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary stent implantation (PCI) for ULMCA; References of the included studies were also retrieved. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0. Results Four studies were included involving 1 611 cases, of which, 802 cases are in the CABG group, while 809 cases were in the PCI group. The results of meta-analysis showed that: comparing with PCI, CABG significantly reduced the postoperative repeat revascularization rate (OR=0.45, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.66, Plt;0.000 1), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in reducing the myocardial infarction incidence (OR=1.28, 95%CI 0.47 to 3.48, P=0.63), mortality rate (OR=1.36, 95%CI 0.80 to 2.34, P=0.26), and the incidence of major adverse cardio-cerebral vascular events (OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.28, P=0.61). Conclusion This study indicates that CABG is superior to PCI in reducing postoperative rate of target vessel revascularization. But CABG and PCI are alike in reducing myocardial infarction incidence, mortality rate, and the incidence of major adverse cardio-cerebral vascular events. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion needs to be verified by more high quality RCTs.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and security through meta-analysis of a comprehensive study of efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus drug-eluting stent percutaneous coronary intervention (DES-PCI), for diabetes mellitus with multi-vessel coronary disease. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched from their establishment dates to 2010. Published information and conference papers including references were handsearched. Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on diabetic patients with coronary multi-vessel disease treated with revascularization were collected and screened by two reviewers independently. After data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0. Results A total of eight studies involving a total of 3 689 cases (CABG group: 1 814 cases; DES-PCI group: 1 875 cases) were included. Results of meta-analyses showed that: compared with the DES-PCI group, the CABG group could significantly reduce postoperative repeat revascularization rate (OR=0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.69, P=0.006) and major cardio-cerebral vascular events (OR=0.49, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.62, Plt;0.000 01). But in reducing mortality rate (OR=0.84, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.10, P=0.21), cerebrovascular events (OR=2.00, 95%CI 0.97 to 4.14, P=0.06) and myocardial infarction incidence rate (OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.53 to 1.59, P=0.75), there were no significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion CABG is superior to DES-PCI in the treatment of diabetic patients with multi-vessel disease. However, due to the limitation of the quality and quantity of the included studies, the above conclusion should be tested by conducting more large-scale, multi-center and prospective RCTs in future.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of prophylactic use of intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) before coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in high risk patients. MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2014), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were electronically searched from inception to July 2014, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies about prophylactic use of IABP before CABG in high risk patients. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 6 RCTs and 6 cohort studies involving 1 359 patients were included, of which 633 prophylactically used IABP before CABG (the IABP group) and 736 didn't prophylactically use IABP before CABG (the control group). The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the control group, prophylactic use of IABP could significantly reduce perioperative mortality (RCT: OR=0.15, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.38, P<0.000 1; cohort study: OR=0.36, 95%CI 0.19 to 0.67, P=0.001) and postoperative LCOS (RCT: OR=0.23, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.43, P<0.000 01; cohort study: OR=0.21, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.43, P<0.000 1); there was no significant difference between two groups in incidence rate of postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) (RCT: OR=0.34, 95%CI 0.10 to 1.11, P=0.07; cohort study: OR=0.56, 95%CI 0.26 to 1.24, P=0.15); the results of combined analyses of RCTs showed that, prophylactic use of IABP could significantly reduce postoperative ICU stay (MD=-42.94, 95%CI -56.11 to -29.76, P<0.000 01) and postoperative hospital stay (MD=-3.83, 95%CI-5.82 to -1.85, P=0.0002), but these differences were not found in the results of combined analyses of cohort studies (MD=-4.68, 95%CI 20.69 to 11.33, P=0.57; MD=-0.77, 95%CI -1.80 to 0.26, P=0.14). ConclusionProphylactic use of IABP before CABG in high risk patients can significantly reduce the perioperative mortality, postoperative LCOS and the length of ICU stay, however it cannot reduce postoperative MI. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high quality studies.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of endoscopic radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from inception to August 2015 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies about endoscopic radial artery harvesting technique versus traditional incision technique for CABG. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 12 studies involving 1359 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that no significant differences were found between the two groups in perioperative mortality (OR=0.66, 95%CI 0.17 to 2.57, P=0.55), the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (OR=0.78, 95%CI 0.30 to 2.06, P=0.62), vascular graft patency rate (OR=1.40, 95%CI 0.80 to 2.45, P=0.24) and the incidence of wound infection (OR=0.59, 95%CI 0.33 to 1.07, P=0.08). The endoscopic group showed significantly lower incidence of hematoma formation (OR=0.39, 95%CI 0.20 to 0.74, P=0.004) and paresthesia (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.88, P=0.02) than that of the incision group. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that, compared with the incision technique, the endoscopic radial artery harvesting could significantly reduce the incidence of hematoma formation and paresthesia in patients underwent CABG. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by carrying out more high-quality studies.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with single-vessel disease of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from inception to Oct. 2015, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about MIDCAB versus PCI for single-vessel disease of the LAD. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. Results A total of 10 RCTs including 1 489 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the PCI group, the MIDCAB group could significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative target vessel revascularization (OR=0.20，95%CI 0.13 to 2.29，P < 0.000 01), and the incidence of main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.58, P < 0.000 01). No significant differences were found between the two groups in total case mortality (OR=1.23, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.83, P=0.31), cardiogenic death (OR=1.12, 95%CI 0.59 to 2.12, P=0.73), and the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (OR=2.16, 95%CI 0.83 to 5.59, P=0.11). Conclusion In reducing the incidences of postoperative target vessels again revascularization and MACCE of patients with single-vessel disease of the LAD, MIDCAB is superior to PCI. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion still needs to be verified by carrying out more high-quality RCTs.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the long-term efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus drug-eluting stent implantation (DES-PCI) for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. MethodsWe searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about CABG versus DES-PCI for patients with coronary multivessel disease from the inception to October 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of seven RCTs, involving 5 723 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the DES-PCI group, the CABG group had lower 1-year incidence of target vessel revascularization (OR=0.39, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.48, P<0.000 01), 5-year mortality (OR=0.78, 95%CI 0.65 to 0.94, P=0.008), and 5-year incidence of myocardial infarction (OR=0.46, 95%CI 0.37 to 0.58, P<0.000 01). However, 1-year, 2-year and 5-year incidences of stroke in the CABG group were significantly higher than that in the DES-PCI group (all P values <0.05). ConclusionThe available evidence suggests that CABG is superior to DES-PCI for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in long-term effects, but CABG could increase the incidence of stroke. Due to the quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality RCTs.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of totally thorascopic (TT) and median sternotomy (MS) approaches for atrial septal defect repair (ASDR). MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2016), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were electronically searched from inception to June 2016, to collect randomized controlled trials or cohort studies about TT vs. MS approaches for ASDR. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 11 cohort studies involving 687 patients were included with 305 patients in the TT group, and 382 patients in the MS group. The results of meta-analysis showed that: The TT group had shorter postoperative ventilation time (MD=-1.49, 95%CI -2.27 to -0.71, P=0.000 2), postoperative ICU stay time (MD=-7.30, 95%CI -12.07 to -2.53, P=0.003), hospital stay time (MD=-2.06, 95%CI -2.80 to -1.32, P<0.000 01) and less postoperative drainage (MD=-199.83, 95%CI -325.96 to -73.70, P=0.002) than the MS group. But the bypass time (MD=9.42, 95%CI 1.55 to 17.30, P=0.02) and aortic clamping time (MD 6.78, 95%CI 3.48 to 10.07, P<0.000 1) of the TT group were significantly longer than those of the MS group. ConclusionCompared with MS, TT can significantly reduce the length of postoperative ventilation, postoperative ICU stay, hospital stay and postoperative drainage. But there are risks of prolonged bypass time and aortic clamping time in the TT group. Due to the quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still needs to be verified by carrying out more studies.
目的总结常温体外循环下经肺动脉内补片修补术治疗成人粗大型动脉导管未闭（patent ductusarteriosus，PDA）的临床经验。 方法回顾性分析新疆医科大学第一附属医院收治的62例直径大于15 mm PDA患者的临床资料，其中男45例、女17例，年龄18～35岁；常温体外循环辅助下经肺动脉前壁切开，用Foley气囊导管堵住PDA开口直视下行补片修补术，合并其它心内畸形的同期进行矫正。 结果全组病例无早期死亡，术中体外循环时间（40.78±11.03）min，住院时间（12.55±8.41）d。通过电话及门诊随访56例，失访6例，失访率9.68%，随访时间2～18（11±5）个月，无1例死亡，复查心脏超声未见残余分流。术后出现低心排血量综合征2例、不同程度的高血压8例，经积极治疗后均痊愈出院。 结论经肺动脉内补片修补术治疗成人粗大型动脉导管未闭，手术操作简单、风险小、效果良好。
ObjectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness and safety of aspirin-clopidogrel combined anti-platelet therapy after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2013), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from their inception to September 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about aspirin-clopidogrel combined anti-platelet therapy after CABG. Two reviewers selected literature independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After data extraction and methological quality assessment of the included studies, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of six RCTs involving 901 patients were included, of which 449 cases were in the aspirin-clopidogrel group (A+C) and 452 cases were in the aspirin with or without placebo group (A+P). The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with A+P, A+C significantly reduced occlusion rates of the saphenous vein graft (RR=0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80, P=0.000 6). But no significant difference was found between the two groups in occlusion rates of the left internal mammary artery graft (RR=0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.18, P=0.78), radial artery graft (RR=0.43, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.46, P=0.18), pleural fluid drainage volume (MD=-1.68, 95%CI-48.69 to 45.32, P=0.94), incidence of major bleeding events (RR=1.20, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.65, P=0.75), major cardiovascular events (OR=0.81, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.72, P=0.58), and mortality within 30 days (RR=0.64, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.44, P=0.52). ConclusionIn reducing occlusion rates of the saphenous vein graft, the A+C group is more effective than the A+P group. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion still needs to be verified by carrying out more high-quality RCTs.
Objective To analyze the clinical efficacy of totally thoracoscopic surgery and conventional thoracotomy in repair of ventricular septal defect (VSD). Methods We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 50 VSD patients admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from January 2015 to January 2017. According to the surgical pattern, they were divided into two groups: a totally thoracoscopic surgery group (21 patients, 13 males, 8 females, aged 38.36±10.02 years), and a thoracotomy group (29 patients, 18 males, 11 females, aged 42.36±13.02 years). The operation time, hospital stay, ventilator-assisted time and thoracic drainage were compared between the two groups. Results There was no death in two groups. In the thoracoscopic group the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time and the aortic clamping time were longer than those of the thoracotomy group (P<0.05), but postoperative drainage, patients with postoperative use of blood products and postoperative hospital stay were less (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in operation time, postoperative ventilator-assisted time or duration of ICU stay. Conclusion Compared with the conventional thoracotomy, totally thoracoscopic VSD repair with less trauma, quicker recovery and less blood use, is safe and reliable and can be used as a preferred surgical intervention.